I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

I wouldn't know, but it was Michael Jackson's drug of choice. which is very strange imo.

Why would opiates be strange drug of choice?

The biological effects of the fentanyl analogues are similar to those of heroin, with the exception that many users report a noticeably less euphoric high associated with the drug and stronger sedative and analgesic effects.[citation needed]

Because Fentanyl seems more geared to knocking you out, rather than having an experience. I have never thought of having surgery and being under anesthesia as a fun experience, but maybe I'm missing something. I guess it's popular also because it is an opiate and they happen to be very addictive.

TharpaChodron wrote:
I wouldn't know, but it was Michael Jackson's drug of choice. which is very strange imo.

Why would opiates be strange drug of choice?

The biological effects of the fentanyl analogues are similar to those of heroin, with the exception that many users report a noticeably less euphoric high associated with the drug and stronger sedative and analgesic effects.[citation needed]

Because Fentanyl seems more geared to knocking you out, rather than having an experience. I have never thought of having surgery and being under anesthesia as a fun experience, but maybe I'm missing something. I guess it's popular also because it is an opiate and they happen to be very addictive.

It'll knock you out at the dose that knocks you out. At a lower dosage...

Anyway, some people like being knocked out, that is the experience they desire. They desire annihilation.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

If someone is not buddhist, and has no instructions, then they should be comfortable. But if you are a practitioner, you need to have a clear mind at the time of death.

The biological effects of the fentanyl analogues are similar to those of heroin, with the exception that many users report a noticeably less euphoric high associated with the drug and stronger sedative and analgesic effects.[citation needed]

Because Fentanyl seems more geared to knocking you out, rather than having an experience. I have never thought of having surgery and being under anesthesia as a fun experience, but maybe I'm missing something. I guess it's popular also because it is an opiate and they happen to be very addictive.

It'll knock you out at the dose that knocks you out. At a lower dosage...

Anyway, some people like being knocked out, that is the experience they desire. They desire annihilation.

Yep, some people do like that feeling, not me! A painless 'knock out' sounds comforting at the time of death, although quite unsatisfactory (from a Buddhist outlook.)

Anecdotally, in my four years as a hospice nurse I never saw a patient die who was conscious immediately prior, they were all unresponsive. Granted, some had large quantities of narcotics/sedatives/anxiolytics on board, but by no means all. In a "natural" death, the normal progression of bodily shutdown leads to unconsciousnes, at least in my observations.

That is not to say that hearing or some type of perception isn't present up to the moment of death, there's no way to know for sure. We always assumed the person could hear, as it's well known in the medical community that many patients who have been comatose report hearing was intact while in that state.

Having seen at least one hundred deaths, I can say that no one ever did the Hollywood version - final words with loved ones, exclaim "Goodbye, cruel world," close eyes and finis.

I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

If someone is not buddhist, and has no instructions, then they should be comfortable. But if you are a practitioner, you need to have a clear mind at the time of death.

But surely it is not the coarse mind that recognises the Clear Light? So what difference does it make?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Grigoris wrote:I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

If someone is not buddhist, and has no instructions, then they should be comfortable. But if you are a practitioner, you need to have a clear mind at the time of death.

But surely it is not the coarse mind that recognises the Clear Light? So what difference does it make?

Sedatives obscure the clarity of the mind in toto because of they way the affect the body.

Malcolm wrote:Sedatives obscure the clarity of the mind in toto because of they way the affect the body.

Just for your information: I am not trying to be contrary, I am trying to understand.

The elements dissolve and the sentient being falls into "darkness" (complete unconsciousness) and then when one "reawakens" the Clear Light experience happens. Now, at this point, the mind has seperated from the body so (theoretically) whatever you have done to the body is now irrelevant, isn't it?

And you haven't really answered my question: Is it coarse mind that experiences the Clear Light?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

justsit wrote:Anecdotally, in my four years as a hospice nurse I never saw a patient die who was conscious immediately prior, they were all unresponsive. Granted, some had large quantities of narcotics/sedatives/anxiolytics on board, but by no means all. In a "natural" death, the normal progression of bodily shutdown leads to unconsciousnes, at least in my observations.

That is not to say that hearing or some type of perception isn't present up to the moment of death, there's no way to know for sure. We always assumed the person could hear, as it's well known in the medical community that many patients who have been comatose report hearing was intact while in that state.

Having seen at least one hundred deaths, I can say that no one ever did the Hollywood version - final words with loved ones, exclaim "Goodbye, cruel world," close eyes and finis.

I'm very interested in hearing first hand accounts like yours. I often wonder how having a spiritual outlook affects people in their last days and things like that.

Do you have the same opinion regarding the death sentence that you have for abortion and euthanasia, or are you just another frothing hypocrite?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Here's the opinion of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, someone who is much more relevant on a Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism forum than say, the Pope:

"Dalai Lama backs euthanasia in exceptional circumstances"

Asked his view on euthanasia, the Dalai Lama said Buddhists believed every life was precious and none more so than human life, adding: "I think it's better to avoid it."

"But at the same time I think with abortion, (which) Buddhism considers an act of killing ... the Buddhist way is to judge the right and wrong or the pros and cons."

He cited the case of a person in a coma with no possibility of recovery or a woman whose pregnancy threatened her life or that of the child or both where the harm caused by not taking action might be greater.

"These are, I think from the Buddhist viewpoint, exceptional cases," he said. So it's best to be judged on a case by case basis."

Also, from the early 90's, HHDL again on the same topic - including abortions:

The Dalai Lama, the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize winner and the self-exiled leader of Tibetan Buddhism, says that abortion and euthanasia are permissible under certain circumstances but that neither should be widely performed.

While on a national tour that brings him to UCLA today and UC Santa Barbara on Sunday, the Buddhist monk told a Houston audience this week that, "generally, abortion is not good" but that it "may be justified" in cases where the child would be born badly deformed or "the mother will suffer."

Speaking at Rice University, he said birth control should be used to prevent unwanted pregnancies. The best form of birth control is to become "a monk or a nun," he joked. "If that is not possible, then other methods are quite OK."

He said that euthanasia, or mercy killing, is a "very complicated" issue but that "from the Buddhist viewpoint generally speaking it is not good." It should only be performed, he said, where it is considered best for the "larger society," or for the patient himself.

Nicholas Weeks wrote:Mother of four battles greed of insurance companies, expedient government and callous people.

So, do you oppose the Death Penalty, or not?

PS Don't bother answering, I found this thread where you basically act as an apologist for capital punishemnt, so the extent of your hypocrisy is quite clear.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde